Murphy v. Countiss

Superior Court of Delaware

Murphy v. Countiss

1 Del. 143

DecidedJuly 5, 1833

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Del. 143 (Murphy v. Countiss) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Murphy v. Countiss, 1 Del. 143 (Del. Ct. App. 1833).

Pincite

Opinion

The Court

said the older authorities sustained the position of the plff’s, attorney. In the time of Lord Kenyon and since, however, *144 the decisions have been that a false imprisonment does not necessarily include a battery.. But it makes no difference here; the false imprisonment, if proved, will entitle the plff. to recover; and not merely for the time the constable was bringing him to jail, but for the whole period of his imprisonment.

Gilpin, for plaintiff. Latimer, for defendant.

The plaintiff had a verdict.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The Court

said the older authorities sustained the position of the plff’s, attorney. In the time of Lord Kenyon and since, however, *144 the decisions have been that a false imprisonment does not necessarily include a battery.. But it makes no difference here; the false imprisonment, if proved, will entitle the plff. to recover; and not merely for the time the constable was bringing him to jail, but for the whole period of his imprisonment.

Gilpin, for plaintiff. Latimer, for defendant.

The plaintiff had a verdict.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Del. 143, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murphy-v-countiss-delsuperct-1833.